Flickr changes- free accounts limited to 1000 images.

ptcanon3ti wrote in post #18743182
What about opening multiple accounts and filling each one? lol

Would require different email accounts.

P.

Pagman wrote in post #18743192
Would require different email accounts.

P.

And I only have about 8 of those.

ptcanon3ti wrote in post #18743182
What about opening multiple accounts and filling each one? lol

For new uploads, sure, that could be a workaround. But moving existing images to additional new accounts would still cause all the links to be broken. And you would still lose all the comments, they would disappear from flickr groups and what not.

I have just heard from smugmug - they are blaming Flickr I quote -

Thanks for your reply. Flickr and SmugMug remain separate services and you've reached the SmugMug Support Heroes may only assist you with questions regarding SmugMug accounts. For all questions or feedback on Flickr, please reach out to the Flickr Support Heroes at:
https://help.flickr.co​m
Only they could pass on your feedback about those changes to the Flickr team.


P.

Pagman wrote in post #18743115
Its not the point - its the priciple of the thing, its just the start of a crack down on free use of the internet in general, we all know over the following years the net will be a totally different thing very much more controled and yes chargable for far more things.

P.

The internet is NOT free to use; you have to pay a subscription charge to access it.
Why do you think that you should be allowed to store images on a photo-sharing website and use their services free of charge?

john crossley wrote in post #18743220
The internet is NOT free to use; you have to pay a subscription charge to access it.
Why do you think that you should be allowed to store images on a photo-sharing website and use their services free of charge?

You miss - understand me john, after we have all payed for our internet connection - however it may be, the main surfing aspect and use of media sites has been free, Flickr was intended to be a photo storage side of Yahoo and as far as I understood Free to use and store upto 1TB but if you wanted to get more addional aspects to it then you could subscribe to the extras.

The choice was always there basic package for free with 1TB of storage or pay the extra for the addional benefits.

Just as a side note Yahoo now part of Oath who have more interference over privacy settings on sites - I now have to aggree to far more cookie and tracking to use sites - far more than ever before.

P.

john crossley wrote in post #18743220
The internet is NOT free to use; you have to pay a subscription charge to access it.
Why do you think that you should be allowed to store images on a photo-sharing website and use their services free of charge?

Because that is how it was when Yahoo ran things! They offered us unlimited space and encouraged us to do away with our paid membership. Me, I was a pro member from the start (24 something a year). I only switched to a free membership August last year. So it's not the money. It's how they will delete images if you don't pay up. Sure, Smugmug has a different business model than Yahoo. So okay, raise the annual fee 100% and by all means limit non-paying members. But don't delete images. That's like punishing people for flickr's previous owner's business model!

An existing customer/new customer line in the sand would have been a good route to take.
If the 3% thing is in fact accurate....

After getting burned by “free” services in the past I don’t rely on them for anything I would rely on.

If anyone is using Flickr for image backup take a look at Amazon Glacier. It’s cheap per gig, and there are desktop apps to integrate file sync.

Pagman wrote in post #18743221
Just as a side note Yahoo now part of Oath who have more interference over privacy settings on sites - I now have to aggree to far more cookie and tracking to use sites - far more than ever before.

P.

Thats because of the EU General Data Protection Regulations.

Jethr0 wrote in post #18743239
An existing customer/new customer line in the sand would have been a good route to take.

Agreed.

I doubt that very much.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18743211
For new uploads, sure, that could be a workaround. But moving existing images to additional new accounts would still cause all the links to be broken. And you would still lose all the comments, they would disappear from flickr groups and what not.

I've already deleted 500 photos from my account so I'm currently under 1000.

New uploads will be my primary concern. ߤ

john crossley wrote in post #18743245
Thats because of the EU General Data Protection Regulations.

That equals - more snooping on us and more interest in what we are doing, to give us a better experience is what they say.


P.

i posted this in the other thread that was closed for this one:
i've got 31K photos on there...i can't really see any option that makes more sense than the $50...but you can also renew early for 30% off i think...so i'll be doing that...

i see a lot of people that arent happy that barely have more than the 1K mark...personally i just don't know if there are other options out there that are better anyways? having the app on my phone gives me literally all those photos within reach no matter where i am...i have tons of family photos on there, i could pull up shots of when my nephew was born 6 years ago in less than a 2 minutes...where else can you get something like that, and for cheaper?

ptcanon3ti wrote in post #18743266
I've already deleted 500 photos from my account so I'm currently under 1000.

I have a little over 2400 images. If I were still active at flickr like I used to be I would take a subscription, but I'm not. Haven't posted anything in ages. So I have my work cut out for me. Of course a lot of those images are not very good or just fun things for POTN and I want to keep the links alive. It's going to be somewhat of a puzzle...

Well, as long as you don't exceed the 1000 image limit. Of course you could open a new free account for that. If they allow that...

Pagman wrote in post #18743276
That equals - more snooping on us and more interest in what we are doing, to give us a better experience is what they say.

Actually no. Websites used to hide all their tracking stuff. Now they have to tell you about it and ask your permission. And good websites give you a choice so you can approve or reject functional cookies, tracking cookies and social media cookies.

I was just reminded there is a way for us to make our completely voluntary contributions to the health and continuing existence of POTN. I'm embarrassed to confess I don't remember the last time I did that before today.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp

As mentioned in notes above, there's no such thing as a free lunch. Pekka pays the large bill here giving us all we care to eat but we are all free to chip in.